I have now. Very interesting report that presents the facts of the situation with little or no value judgement. I have absolutely no idea why you'd think it was "rubbish" unless you dispute the findings of the 2011 census.

You literally cannot pick up a newspaper these days without someone discussing these kind of issues. And always, but always, articles with a particular slant on it start with a comment along the lines of "liberal freedoms being used to silence the writer". It's quite astonishing how many journalists and commentators in the national press use their articles to tell us how they're being silenced.

My guess is that it's you that is reluctant to talk about this openly because you're a little bit afraid of what you might find yourself saying. You're projecting your fears about your own character and creating a big liberal "boogieman" to make yourself feel better.

Being honest with yourself and the rest of us would be a start.

1) Sorry little or no value judgement? Did you read the article:

In favour of "his judgement":

"and what emerges is a much more positive story than some headlines would make you think.""I think the evidence suggests it is also about working class aspiration and economic success." "the dream of escaping to the country became a reality for tens of thousands of urban white Britons. But did they leave willingly or were they forced to move?""often having prospered from the housing boom and the capital's economic growth - cashed in their assets and bought themselves that little cottage in the countryside or by the sea.""It is a story of aspiration. It is a story of success."

Taking in other factors:

"Some white British may have moved because their neighbourhood has been culturally transformed, the tea rooms and restaurants replaced by takeaway chicken shops and halal supermarkets serving the new arrivals."

But of course that hasn't even bothered to be investigated. Yet you shall see from the comments below from Londoners that they've left because they're neighbourhoods have been rapidly changing. Some comments have even said that they've moved because their son/daughters school barely has any English-speaking children in it.

Whatever you want to label it, the vast majority of people feel intimidated if they are surrounded by people of another culture. That's not saying that that culture is bad or that ours is superior, but it is DIFFERENT. The fact that this premise does not even get probed by the article is hardly impartial?

2) I was referring to POLITICS, not the press. The press are actually one of the few places that do discuss this, and whilst I don't agree entirely with the way they do it, I am glad that they do do it. If you were discuss this in certain workplaces, then you would be sacked. It never gets discussed in Politics, particularly in the arenas of the House Of Commons. Yes there are a few more important issues like the Economy, however it is quite clear from the British public that they see this as a VERY important issue and I don't think the Politicians represent that. I think the three main parties in particular like to keep quiet over the issue, and like has been mentioned, I doubt they few politicians actually live in areas that are effected (and if it is in their constituency then they live "richer" areas due to their salary.

3) Well what more can I say:

POINT 1: I think the real problem is the EXTENT and PACE of all this. I am not against people moving to another country and as you will probably remind me it has been happening ever since humans first walked. However I don't like the EXTENT - I think that with a population of 70 million already which has been rapidly accelerating I think we need to start trying to get that figure down. Secondly, pace: let's not forget that it was only in the late 1950s that the first wave of immigration happened. This recent wave (let's say 1997 or 2001-2011) has been much greater. Essentially you are seeing these huge changes in ONE generation and I think it would be better for the country to see them in THREE or FOUR generations (the way to do that would be caps)

POINT 2: As a nation we need to compete economically with other nations. It is a basic premise of the way our world currently is. It is all relative: if one man gets richer than one man gets poorer. It seems very harsh, but get away from Utopian visions, and it is fact. To what extent are migrants really helping Britain economically? I can see Britain as a currently in the long term getting poorer and I do see this as one of the contributing factors. The effects this is having on schools, NHS and welfare must not be understated.

POINT 3: Again label me a racist if you want, but I see different opinions concerning different "groups" (shall I say) forming. Again this is part of human nature. Let's just say that there have been certain groups that, how can I put this, are less inclined to "mingle" with the rest of us. There has been one group that have been ascribed certain characteristics: "that we are superior (because of our faith)", "that you cannot marry out of the religion", "that we don't want to be governed or enforced in the same way as the rest of the country" right the way through to (unbelievably) "this is our patch" and "we have our own laws, we don't abide by British ones" to even "we aim to fundamentally change British values". No surprises that group I am referring to, but I don't believe people with these beliefs should be allowed to settle in the United Kingdom as I believe they go against our core ones.

To what extent (if at all) will these threats or headlines or whatever you want to call them be taken to - I guess only time will truly tell. But I can tell you one thing: the men making the decisions over these issues will be DEAD before they find out.

POINT 4: This is not quite as widespread or indeed as natural as you think. When you look at the world as a whole then there are remarkably few areas (or countries or cities) that this is really happening. Obviously the prime example is the United States (which to be fair as always been a melting pot for a very long time now), but really you are looking at certain cities in Western Europe and Australia and a few other countries. Again don't misunderstand me: I'm not saying that migration isn't happening in Russia, China, Japan, India, Africa, Eastern Europe, Middle East and South America: I'm saying it is not happening to the same extent.

Hence this is why I consider this an experiment for Britain. But because it is quite revolutionally and new (in the same way 1917 USSR was a new experiment in the world), with really only the United States as any kind of example (though a different one), I do fear what repercussions this can all have. Repercussions that are unknown at the moment.

this country has been multicultural for thousands of years.

if you don't want GB to be multicultural, what should our'culture' consist of? How would you set about maing it fir your vision?

Why can't/whenisn't it talked about?

Pretty much answered in above post I hope.

Poles don't usually marry their illiterate, monolingual cousin from their father's village though.

The problem with the whole first generation, second generation, third generation model is that it doesn't allow for marriage patterns that differ from the European norm.

Yes of course, issues like this need to be looked at. Again it is all about the whole "wanting to mingle" in my opinion. I know I would (and my parents would) be happy to marry into any race or religion but it does seem like a lot of people moving to the UK don't hold those views.

The problem with multiculturalism is, in my opinion, that it has been imposed on the white working class by middle class liberal lefties, who have have effectively told many (and lets face it, mainly asian) immigrants that their culture and way of life is just as "valid" in post industrial Britain as it is in pre-industrial Kashmir or rural Pakistan.

Obviously the fact that south asians are "black" has had a bearing on their assimilation, but much more important is the fact that they were implicitly told that they didn't have to learn english, that street signs and leaflets were printed for them, that accomodations have been made for behaviours which are unacceptable in modern society.

By contrast, eastern european immigrants after WWII were left to get on with it, and get on with it they did and assimilated seamlessly into society.

Everyone on here knows my political stance so I don't think I can be accused of racism, unlike many young islamists who can be and are.

I think you've hit the nail on the head with the first phrase: "imposed".

the poles and ukranians in Leeds and Bradford maintain their culture very much.

The people who settled in the UK after ww2 were and are white, from an industrialise European country, with their religion catered for. Thosee industries; mining, steel, engineering and so on were replicated in both countries. They established their own clubs and social structures which still exist. Their way of life was similar to the country they came from

Asians came from the other side of the world, from an entirely different way of life, believing in an entirely alien way of living, in a climate they weren't accustomed to, and they were of a different skin colour and ate entirely different food.

when wasn't the UK multicultural?

What should the UK's culture consist of?

I believe British culture should change at a slower pace (more akin to the cultures of other countries) than it is doing now.I believe that those moving to Britain should expect to abide by fundamental British principles and valuesI believe that those moving to Britain should expect to genuinely contribute something towards the country (particularly economically), to a greater extent even then many who are already hereI believe that those moving to Britain should have a good grasp of EnglishI believe that those moving to Britain should not be entitled to the same state benefits that British people enjoy until a certain periodI believe that those that have recently moved to Britain and commit crimes should have their permission to settle revokedI believe Britain as a country should look towards ways of slowly lowering our overall population

Or quite simply, if that is too much to enforce: limit the overall number of migrants allowed to settle in Britain by creating a low, annual, unmovable quota.

This is exactly the point for me. As an Island nation, we've been assimilating and adapting to different cultures for as long as the British isles have been populated. Not to the same extent as the last 150 years, but still enough to shape our shared history, our culture and above all our language. English is one of the most "mongrel" languages in the world, with bits from Norse/Danish, Norman French, Latin, German and Lord knows what else.

It is worrying that there are some tensions between different communities and faiths, but that's not a new thing. We've always been a bit inward looking. Whether it's any worse now I'm not so sure. There may be issues in some specific places - Bradford being a good example, Luton another - but I'm not convinced it's the same in all towns and cities. Bristol is one of the most multicultural cities in the UK - like a mini Birmingham, sort of - and I've never experienced tensions. I know there were race riots in St Pauls years ago, but generally the place is pretty relaxed and well integrated.

There is a world of difference between a country having various tribes or nationalities settling and spreading about over centuries or even millennia and many people coming to live there in a short space of time.

I think there's a difference between believing that the country will struggle with increasing immigration at a time of high unemployment, economic contraction and no investment in health, education, housing or transport - and saying, "These brown people come over and they're not like us at all."

Yes. There is a huge difference.

Being upset with the way your neighbourhood is going is perfectly natural. Immigration is good for the economy as a whole, but people do not lead their lives in the economy as a whole. They live in their own little part of it.

I believe British culture should change at a slower pace (more akin to the cultures of other countries) than it is doing now.I believe that those moving to Britain should expect to abide by fundamental British principles and valuesI believe that those moving to Britain should expect to genuinely contribute something towards the country (particularly economically), to a greater extent even then many who are already hereI believe that those moving to Britain should have a good grasp of EnglishI believe that those moving to Britain should not be entitled to the same state benefits that British people enjoy until a certain periodI believe that those that have recently moved to Britain and commit crimes should have their permission to settle revokedI believe Britain as a country should look towards ways of slowly lowering our overall population

Or quite simply, if that is too much to enforce: limit the overall number of migrants allowed to settle in Britain by creating a low, annual, unmovable quota.

You will no doubt be astonished to discover that I pretty much agree with all of that.

me toothere were also polish shops ad bakeris in bradford and a po0lish meat shop in the old market. I was regular in MIlo's on Easby Road back in te day.

as for making te plce their home, maybe a check on the contribution of Asians to the UK economy might put some perspective on things. My friend Joe Sczepanski's mother never learned English-I don't know how prevalent that was. It'snever good to use particular examples to illustrate a general point. Fev had a coach called George Pianiaziak, his motherspoke no English as well and his father spoke very little English ither. I think it's a little invidious though to directly compare Pakitani/Bangladeshi immigrants with Eastern Europeans in general sense for reasons I've given.

To call somene racist is a major allegation to make against a person's character andmustn't be done lightly. At the same time anyone taking part in such a discussion needs to choose their words carefully, and to have clear, verifiable and relevant evidence to support what they are saying, rather than hearsay, rumours, skewed information and unverifiable impressions.

W still haven't arrived at what this British ulture is that some people feel that te population of the country should live itslife by, and what should be done with those who don't wish to do so.

What always makes me chuckle about the topic of multiculturalism is this idea that it is a modern phenomenon; that, and the belief that there was some golden age where we had one accepted culture that 'we British' adhered to. For a start 'Britain', or the various incarnations of the United Kingdom if you prefer, is, and has been, made up of at least four nationalities (five if you include Britishness). That is a handful of cultures before you start considering the diversity existing within even the indigenous population within each nation.

And, of course, a major contribution towards culture is religious background, and, boy, do we do diversity within these islands! Anglicanism, Roman Catholicism, Presbyterianism, any one of the various non-conformist denominations.

What we have had at various times are attempts to impose cultural uniformity by the dominant elements in society. Roman Catholicism was imposed, Anglicanism then became dominant, and Roman Catholicism was suppressed. Then we had the denominations emerging from the reformation, with Presbyterianism becoming dominant in Scotland, and 'dissenting' religions growing in influence in various parts of these islands. All sorts of methods were used to oppress difference, including death, disqualification from owning property or standing for office, and all, ultimately failed.

And while monolingualism has been all but completely successful, there are still small populations that maintain the ancient indigenous languages of these islands. It may annoy some that leaflets, websites and services are available in Welsh, Scots Gaelic and Irish, but these are important provisions that support our multicultural society.

No, multiculturalism has nothing to do with people with darker skin and non-Christian faiths coming over here for work and a better life, and it has certainly not been imposed by 'middle class liberal lefties' (FFS). It has everything to do with people fighting to preserve what they feel is their own cultural identity, especially when the pressure has been to conform to some, more powerful, norm. Followers of rugby league should have some understanding of that.

"There are now more Trident submarines based in Scotland than there are MPs to vote for them."

The problem with multiculturalism is, in my opinion, that it has been imposed on the white working class by middle class liberal lefties, who have have effectively told many (and lets face it, mainly asian) immigrants that their culture and way of life is just as "valid" in post industrial Britain as it is in pre-industrial Kashmir or rural Pakistan.

Obviously the fact that south asians are "black" has had a bearing on their assimilation, but much more important is the fact that they were implicitly told that they didn't have to learn english, that street signs and leaflets were printed for them, that accomodations have been made for behaviours which are unacceptable in modern society

....

Everyone on here knows my political stance so I don't think I can be accused of racism, unlike many young islamists who can be and are.

Left wingers can certainly be racist. I strongly doubt you are, judging by what you write here.

In my opinion anyone who wants to live here should have a decent standard of English. Preferably when they arrive, but pretty soon after that if not. Personally, I can't see why that's even controversial. How can you live well here and make a decent life if you can't nip out to the shops to buy a pint of milk?

Left wingers can certainly be racist. I strongly doubt you are, judging by what you write here.

In my opinion anyone who wants to live here should have a decent standard of English. Preferably when they arrive, but pretty soon after that if not. Personally, I can't see why that's even controversial. How can you live well here and make a decent life if you can't nip out to the shops to buy a pint of milk?

This article relating to a violent crime illustrates the current problems in Bradford.The two communities operate under different mores and the courts are too lenient on Moslems compared to ethnic "traditional British" people ... i.e. whites, Afro-Caribbeans, Hindus, Sikhs and associated groups.

I think that
1. A white man would have got jail for the same violent offence, and would have expected to.
2. No white wife would have pleaded with the judge to be lenient, or be prepared to carry on living in the same home as her assailant.

This article relating to a violent crime illustrates the current problems in Bradford.The two communities operate under different mores and the courts are too lenient on Moslems compared to ethnic "traditional British" people ... i.e. whites, Afro-Caribbeans, Hindus, Sikhs and associated groups.

I think that1. A white man would have got jail for the same violent offence, and would have expected to.2. No white wife would have pleaded with the judge to be lenient, or be prepared to carry on living in the same home as her assailant.

The man must attend the Ummid Project in Bradford that works with offenders from Asia.

How do you know he's a muslim?

Also, knowing someone that has worked (albeit in a peripheral role) with the Police Domestic Violence unit, you would be shocked at how difficult it is to get people to testify against violent partners of whichever religion, race or colour. They are repeatedly taken back into the family home, excuses are made, lies and half truths are believed

And finally, I would take your assertions that

1. A white man would have got jail for the same violent offence, and would have expected to.2. No white wife would have pleaded with the judge to be lenient, or be prepared to carry on living in the same home as her assailant.to be ill judged at best, but to me they sound particularly unpleasant and racist.

This article relating to a violent crime illustrates the current problems in Bradford.The two communities operate under different mores and the courts are too lenient on Moslems compared to ethnic "traditional British" people ... i.e. whites, Afro-Caribbeans, Hindus, Sikhs and associated groups.

I think that1. A white man would have got jail for the same violent offence, and would have expected to.2. No white wife would have pleaded with the judge to be lenient, or be prepared to carry on living in the same home as her assailant.

You're possibly right on point 1 but so wrong on point 2. Every week there are stories of women of all creeds and colours who's boyfriends have killed their children after years of systematic abuse. This is far worse, far more evil than clocking someone with a frying pan, but they put up with it because "They love Darren/Wayne/Kyle" and are pathetic creatures who fortunately tend to get what's coming to them in prison .

What always makes me chuckle about the topic of multiculturalism is this idea that it is a modern phenomenon; that, and the belief that there was some golden age where we had one accepted culture that 'we British' adhered to. For a start 'Britain', or the various incarnations of the United Kingdom if you prefer, is, and has been, made up of at least four nationalities (five if you include Britishness). That is a handful of cultures before you start considering the diversity existing within even the indigenous population within each nation.

And, of course, a major contribution towards culture is religious background, and, boy, do we do diversity within these islands! Anglicanism, Roman Catholicism, Presbyterianism, any one of the various non-conformist denominations.

What we have had at various times are attempts to impose cultural uniformity by the dominant elements in society. Roman Catholicism was imposed, Anglicanism then became dominant, and Roman Catholicism was suppressed. Then we had the denominations emerging from the reformation, with Presbyterianism becoming dominant in Scotland, and 'dissenting' religions growing in influence in various parts of these islands. All sorts of methods were used to oppress difference, including death, disqualification from owning property or standing for office, and all, ultimately failed.

And while monolingualism has been all but completely successful, there are still small populations that maintain the ancient indigenous languages of these islands. It may annoy some that leaflets, websites and services are available in Welsh, Scots Gaelic and Irish, but these are important provisions that support our multicultural society.

No, multiculturalism has nothing to do with people with darker skin and non-Christian faiths coming over here for work and a better life, and it has certainly not been imposed by 'middle class liberal lefties' (FFS). It has everything to do with people fighting to preserve what they feel is their own cultural identity, especially when the pressure has been to conform to some, more powerful, norm. Followers of rugby league should have some understanding of that.

I don't anyone who objects to multiculturalism really has Celtic minority languages in mind. I don't object to stuff being translated in Welsh but why it needs to be translated into a dozen South Asian languages is another issue.

This article relating to a violent crime illustrates the current problems in Bradford.The two communities operate under different mores and the courts are too lenient on Moslems compared to ethnic "traditional British" people ... i.e. whites, Afro-Caribbeans, Hindus, Sikhs and associated groups.

I think that1. A white man would have got jail for the same violent offence, and would have expected to.2. No white wife would have pleaded with the judge to be lenient, or be prepared to carry on living in the same home as her assailant.